Agenda item

 The Board received a presentation on the draft DAAT Needs Assessment and noted that completing this was a key part of planning the annual drug treatment process. Its essential aim was to assess the drug treatment needs of adult drug users against the background of decreasing budgets.  The assessment further examined: specific needs of the drug treatment population, focus on outcomes and social re-integration, assessed the needs relating employment, training and education and the reasons for drop outs from treatment and updated prevalence data on PDUs (Persistent Drug Users). The Board was provided with information on the context, key national drivers, and methodology of the assessment.

Key findings noted by the Board from the assessment were:

Ø      That the number of crack and opiate users in Haringey was higher than the London average.

Ø      Alcohol misuse had a higher impact on health service than drug abuse.  There was also no clear connection to drug abuse and it fuelling violent crime.

Ø      There was no significant change in the demographic profile of drug users, although there were reported to be 60 different nationalities in the process of treatment which indicated issues with servicing different language requirements.

Ø      A need to focus on young drug users as age of drug abuse was likely to begin in the 15-24 age range.

Ø      Clear link between drug misuse and deprivation

Ø      Support workers were following safeguarding guidelines and checking if there were children living at home. A detailed assessment had been approved by the LSCB and once completed was distributed to the client’s GP and health visitor.

Ø       That there were key issues of stigma faced by clients returning to work after treatment and this highlighted the need to begin work related support  during treatment.

Ø      Success of treatment - data showed that there was more improvement during the first year. Therefore aim should be to start and complete treatment within a year.

Ø       It would be essential to record when clients leave and come back into treatment.

Ø      Use of alcohol was found to be higher after drug treatment was completed.

Conclusions from the assessment were: that there was a need to improve pathways to psychological services; employment training should be fully incorporated into the treatment process from the start. The borough would be at the forefront of adapting PDUs recovery model into the treatment system. There was a need to robustly monitor the re – entrance to treatment by examining what happens outside of treatment and the impact of social networks.  The findings were to be assessed by stakeholders with the assessment updated to include results from user surveys and focus group meetings. There would also be a cost benefit section added.

Board members discussed the findings of the assessment  with concerns raised about: housing , employment, support network for young people in danger of drug misuse, the impact of  leaner budgets on support services around the treatment of clients and how Partnership  Boards will work together to ensure that strategies and funding is fully utilised  to support  vulnerable young people.  Board members recommended a need to be aware of housing problems experienced by clients when they enter the treatment programme. It was acknowledged that there is often a lack of influence over this but it should nonetheless be factored in. Board members advised of the necessity, as a borough, to maximise on the opportunities available for employment as this was felt to be a key factor in the overall rehabilitation of clients.

The Board  further discussed the need to look for opportunities and initiatives to support young people with changing their social network and environment as it was often the case that there was no support or social framework for young people who became  involved in crime. It was expressed by some Board members,  that the overarching issue of poverty,  which was  linked to offending and drug misuse, needed to be tackled in a consistent joined up way by the Partnership Boards especially as  there would be less funding available in the future . In addition it was suggested that there should be a robust approach to how agreed actions, relating to overarching issues, will be tackled by the Partnership Boards. In response, it was noted, that the Partnership Boards were already sharing expertise and information across the thematic boards. For example, the Community Safety Team were members of the Integrated Housing Board meetings and had a key input role. It was already recognised by the Partnership Boards that, due to the reductions in public funding, there would inevitably be a necessity for the HSP boards to work in closer partnership to fully capitalise on the funding available.

The Board thanked Marion Morris for the informative presentation and noted that this was next to be received by the Wellbeing Partnership Board.

RESOLVED:

That the presentation and draft DAAT Needs Assessment were noted.